President Obama begins his seventh year in office in good position. At this point in his eight-year term, the unemployment rate is a) lower than Reagan's at the same time; b) lower than Romney/Republican targets for the end of 2016 and St. Ronnie's for his entire term; c) Medicare is now solvent at least through 2031; and, d) ~10 million more people are covered by health insurance.

America is the richest country in all of history. We have the largest economy and the largest number of millionaires and billionaires. At the same time, however, we lead the developed world in economic inequality.

Senator Elizabeth Warren has become the most visible leader of the growing populist movement that is uniting a new majority around an agenda for economic change. But with media visibility comes over-simplified media analysis.

If businesses adopt a circular paradigm that tracks the environmental impacts of their products throughout their entire lifecycles, we can help alleviate climate change and ensure we have enough natural resources to use in perpetuity.

A popular proposal in Washington right now: "Fund infrastructure through corporate tax reform." Unfortunately, this is Washington/corporate-speak for letting companies off the hook for most of the up to $700 billion they owe on corporate profits they are hoarding "offshore" if they let us use a little bit of it for infrastructure.

Throughout America, disinvestment in infrastructure is far more typical. America's focus seems to be on individual spending, not investment in community resources. We refuse to tax ourselves and the signs of neglect are everywhere.

Barry Z. Cynamon and Steven M. Fazzari are exploring how the massive debt which led to the Great Recession, the spending collapse that followed, and the stagnation that persists are all linked to income inequality. In this interview, they discuss what their findings mean for America.

Instead of making a "deal" on deferment and letting the corporations just keep this money they owe us, let's fix this loophole and give most of this tax money to the 242 million adult U.S. residents. What's left over (and there might be a lot -- as much as $215 billion) can be used to fix our infrastructure and other priorities.

The issue isn't what Wasserman Schultz said with regard to a 'top to bottom assessment' but rather who will do the assessment. If it is the same people who planned the mid-terms' non-message we are in for the same problems next time around.

With all of these wonderful resources, what could possibly be the downside of entrepreneurship? Well, there are a few reasons, and they indicate the wider systems of institutions, policies and economics that play just as large a part in shaping the state of the world.

If and when she announces her candidacy for president, I suggest she express her resolve to bring full employment with fair wages to America, and announce a working group including Nobel laureates and leading economic thinkers to develop bold ideas to make full employment happen.

The world economy faces huge infrastructure financing needs that are not being matched on the supply side. Emerging market economies, in particular, have had to deal with international long-term private debt financing options that are less supportive of infrastructure finance.

None of these items are particularly controversial, but represent simple ways that we can save lives, save money, and make laws fairer. It's too early to call it quits for the year -- it will be even more difficult to get anything done next year with half of the Senate running for president.

Tremendous efforts are under way to upgrade sub-Saharan Africa's infrastructure. But the needs on the ground are still immense as evidenced by the frequent electricity blackouts, poor roads, and insufficient access to clean water in many countries.

Thirty-years of leadership proficiency shines through the compact instructions in Lead Like it Matters ... Because It Does. More than a book, the content is a virtual classroom leading the reader through the steps to fully develop his/her leadership potential.

Either we can choose to elect those who have proven themselves to have the courage and the foresight to make decisions with the long-term benefit of working people in mind, or we can elect those who are too shortsighted and too captive to special interests to make the calls that will help our nation thrive.